Iowa Motor Fuel Tax Monthly Reports, February 2011

The monthly fuel tax report from Iowa Department of Transportation to the Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance.

Iowa Motor Fuel Tax Monthly Reports, May 2011

The monthly fuel tax report from Iowa Department of Transportation to the Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance.

Iowa Motor Fuel Tax Monthly Reports, September 2010

The monthly fuel tax report from Iowa Department of Transportation to the Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance.

Iowa Motor Fuel Tax Monthly Reports, December 2010

The monthly fuel tax report from Iowa Department of Transportation to the Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance.

2011 Road Use Tax Fund (RUTF) Study A report to the Iowa Legislature, per 2011 Iowa Code Section 307.31

The transportation system is in demand 24/7 and 365 days a year irrespective of neither the weather nor the conditions. Iowa’s transportation system is an integral and essential part of society serving commerce and daily functions of all Iowans across the state. A high quality transportation system serves as the artery for economic activity and, the condition of the infrastructure is a key element for our future growth opportunities. A key component of Iowa’s transportation system is the public roadway system owned and maintained by the state, cities and counties. In order to regularly re-evaluate the conditions of Iowa’s public roadway infrastructure and assess the ability of existing revenues to meet the needs of the system, the Iowa Department of Transportation’s 2006 Road Use Tax Fund (RUTF) report to the legislature included a recommendation that a study be conducted every five years. That recommendation was included in legislation adopted in 2007 and signed into law. The law specifically requires the following (2011 Iowa Code Section 307.31): •“The department shall periodically review the current revenue levels of the road use tax fund and the sufficiency of those revenues for the projected construction and maintenance needs of city, county, and state governments in the future. The department shall submit a written report to the general assembly regarding its findings by December 31 every five years, beginning in 2011. The report may include recommendations concerning funding levels needed to support the future mobility and accessibility for users of Iowa's public road system.” •“The department shall evaluate alternative funding sources for road maintenance and construction and report to the general assembly at least every five years on the advantages and disadvantages and the viability of alternative funding mechanisms.” Consistent with this requirement, the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) has prepared this study. Recognizing the importance of actively engaging with the public and transportation stakeholders in any discussion of public roadway conditions and needs, Governor Terry E. Branstad announced on March 8, 2011, the creation of, and appointments to, the Governor’s Transportation 2020 Citizen Advisory Commission (CAC). The CAC was tasked with assisting the Iowa DOT as they assess the condition of Iowa’s roadway system and evaluate current and future funding available to best address system needs. In particular the CAC was directed to gather input from the public and stakeholders regarding the condition of Iowa’s public roadway system, the impact of that system, whether additional funding is needed to maintain/improve the system, and, if so, what funding mechanisms ought to be considered. With this input, the CAC prepared a report and recommendations that were presented to Governor Branstad and the Iowa DOT in November 2011 for use in the development of this study. The CAC’s report is available at www.iowadot.gov/transportation2020/pdfs/CAC%20REPORT%20FINAL%20110211.pdf. The CAC’s report was developed utilizing analysis and information from the Iowa DOT. Therefore, the report forms the basis for this study and the two documents are very similar. Iowa is fortunate to have an extensive public roadway system that provides access to all areas of the state and facilitates the efficient movement of goods and people. However, it is also a tremendous challenge for the state, cities and counties to maintain and improve this system given flattening revenue, lost buying power, changing demands on the system, severe weather, and an aging system. This challenge didn’t appear overnight and for the last decade many studies have been completed to look into the situation and the legislature has taken significant action to begin addressing the situation. In addition, the Iowa DOT and Iowa’s cities and counties have worked jointly and independently to increase efficiency and streamline operations. All of these actions have been successful and resulted in significant changes; however, it is apparent much more needs to be done. A well-maintained, high-quality transportation system reduces transportation costs and provides consistent and reliable service. These are all factors that are critical in the evaluation companies undertake when deciding where to expand or locate new developments. The CAC and Iowa DOT heard from many Iowans that additional investment in Iowa’s roadway system is vital to support existing jobs and continued job creation in the state of Iowa. Beginning June 2011, the CAC met regularly to review material and discuss potential recommendations to address Iowa’s roadway funding challenges. This effort included extensive public outreach with meetings held in seven locations across Iowa and through a Transportation 2020 website hosted by the Iowa DOT (www.iowadot.gov/transportation2020). Over 500 people attended the public meetings held through the months of August and September, with 198 providing verbal or written comment at the meetings or through the website. Comments were received from a wide array of individuals. The public comments demonstrated overwhelming support for increased funding for Iowa’s roads. Through the public input process, several guiding principles were established to guide the development of recommendations. Those guiding principles are: • Additional revenues are restricted for road and bridge improvements only, like 95 percent of the current state road revenue is currently. This includes the fuel tax and registration fees. • State and local governments continue to streamline and become more efficient, both individually and by looking for ways to do things collectively. • User fee concept is preserved, where those who use the roads pay for them, including non¬residents. • Revenue-generating methods equitable across users. • Increase revenue generating mechanisms that are viable now but begin to implement and set the stage for longer-term solutions that bring equity and stability to road funding. • Continue Iowa’s long standing tradition of state roadway financing coming from pay-as-you-go financing. Iowa must not fall into the situation that other states are currently facing where the majority of their new program dollars are utilized to pay the debt service of past bonding. Based on the analysis of Iowa’s public roadway needs and revenue and the extensive work of the Governor’s Transportation 2020 Citizen Advisory Commission, the Iowa DOT has identified specific recommendations. The recommendations follow very closely the recommendations of the CAC (CAC recommendations from their report are repeated in Appendix B). Following is a summary of the recommendations which are fully documented beginning on page 21. 1. Through a combination of efficiency savings and increased revenue, a minimum of $215 million of revenue per year should be generated to meet Iowa’s critical roadway needs. 2. The Code of Iowa should be changed to require the study of the sufficiency of the state’s road funds to meet the road system’s needs every two years instead of every five years to coincide with the biennial legislative budget appropriation schedule. 3.Modify the current registration fee for electric vehicles to be based on weight and value using the same formula that applies to most passenger vehicles. 4.Consistent with existing Code of Iowa requirements, new funding should go to the TIME-21 Fund up to the cap ($225 million) and remaining new funding should be distributed consistent with the Road Use Tax Fund distribution formula. 5.The CAC recommended the Iowa DOT at least annually convene meetings with cities and counties to review the operation, maintenance and improvement of Iowa’s public roadway system to identify ways to jointly increase efficiency. In direct response to this recommendation, Governor Branstad directed the Iowa DOT to begin this effort immediately with a target of identifying $50 million of efficiency savings that can be captured from the over $1 billion of state revenue already provided to the Iowa DOT and Iowa’s cities and counties to administer, maintain and improve Iowa’s public roadway system. This would build upon past joint and individual actions that have reduced administrative costs and resulted in increased funding for improvement of Iowa’s public roadway system. Efficiency actions should be quantified, measured and reported to the public on a regular basis. 6.By June 30, 2012, Iowa DOT should complete a study of vehicles and equipment that use Iowa’s public roadway system but pay no user fees or substantially lower user fees than other vehicles and equipment.

Road Use Tax Fund Efficiency Report, January 2012

In the November 2011 report issued by the Governor’s Transportation 2020 Citizen Advisory Commission (CAC), the commission recommended the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT), at least annually, convene meetings with the cities and counties to review the operation, maintenance and improvement of Iowa’s public roadway system to identify ways to jointly increase efficiency. In response to this recommendation, Gov. Branstad directed the Iowa DOT to begin this effort immediately with a target of identifying $50 million of efficiency savings that can be captured from the $1.2 billion of Road Use Tax Funds (RUTF) provided to the Iowa DOT, cities and counties to administer, maintain and improve the public roadway system. This would build upon past joint and individual actions that have reduced administrative costs and resulted in increased funding for system improvements. Efficiency actions should be quantified, measured and reported to the public on a regular basis. Beyond the discussion of identifying funding solutions to our road and bridge needs, it is critical that all jurisdictions that own, maintain and improve the nation’s road and bridge systems demonstrate to the public these funds are utilized in the most efficient and effective manner. This requires continual innovation in all aspects of transportation planning, design, construction and maintenance - done in a transparent manner to clearly demonstrate to the public how their funds are being utilized. The Iowa DOT has identified 13 efficiency measures separated into two distinct categories – Program Efficiencies and Partnership Efficiencies. The total value of the efficiency measures is $50 million. Many of the efficiency items will need input, refinement and partnership from cities, counties, other local jurisdictions, and stakeholder interest groups. The Iowa DOT has begun meetings with many of these groups to help identify potential efficiency measures and strategies for moving forward. These partnerships and discussions will continue through implementation of the efficiency measures. Dependent on the measures identified, additional action may be required by the legislature, Iowa Transportation Commission, and/or other bodies to implement the action. In addition, a formal process will be developed to quantify, measure and report the results of actions taken on a regular basis.

Managing the crises : How do Swiss municipalities react to the crisis and what explains the differences ?

Swiss municipalities are to an import ant extent responsible for their own resources. Since these resources primarily depend on income and property tax from individuals and enterprises, their budgets are likely to be directly affected by the actual crisis of the financial sector and the economy. This paper investigates how the municipalities perceive this threat and how they reacted to it or plan to do so. In a nationwide survey conducted at the end of 2009 in all 2596 Swiss municipalities, we asked the local secretaries which measures they launch in order to cope with expected losses in tax income and a possible increase of welfare spending. Do the municipalities rather rely on Keynesian measures increasing public spending and accepting greater deficits, or do they try to avoid further deficits by austerity measures and a withdrawal of planned investments? The paper shows that only a few municipalities - mainly the bigger ones - expect to be strongly hit by the crisis. Their reactions, however, do not reveal the clear patterns theory lets to expect. Preferences for austerity measures and deficit spending become visible but many municipalities take measures from both theories. The strongest explaining factor whether municipalities react is the affectedness by the crisis followed by the fact that the municipality belongs to the French speaking part of the country. Size also has an effect whereas the strength of the Social Democrats is negligible. More difficult is it, to explain what kind of measures municipalities are likely to take.

Estimating and explaining the effect of education and income on head and neck cancer risk : INHANCE consortium pooled analysis of 31 case-control studies from 27 countries

Low socioeconomic status has been reported to be associated with head and neck cancer risk. However, previous studies have been too small to examine the associations by cancer subsite, age, sex, global region, and calendar time, and to explain the association in terms of behavioural risk factors. Individual participant data of 23,964 cases with head and neck cancer and 31,954 controls from 31 studies in 27 countries pooled with random effects models. Overall, low education was associated with an increased risk of head and neck cancer (OR = 2·50; 95%CI 2·02- 3·09). Overall one-third of the increased risk was not explained by differences in the distribution of cigarette smoking and alcohol behaviours; and it remained elevated among never users of tobacco and non-drinkers (OR = 1·61; 95%CI 1·13 - 2·31). More of the estimated education effect was not explained by cigarette smoking and alcohol behaviours: in women than in men, in older than younger groups, in the oropharynx than in other sites, in South/Central America than in Europe/North America, and was strongest in countries with greater income inequality. Similar findings were observed for the estimated effect of low vs high household income. The lowest levels of income and educational attainment were associated with more than 2-fold increased risk of head and neck cancer, which is not entirely explained by differences in the distributions of behavioural risk factors for these cancers, and which varies across cancer sites, sexes, countries, and country income inequality levels. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Progressive Taxes and Firm Births

Tax reform proposals in the spirit of the "flat tax" model typically aim to reduce three parameters: the average tax burden, the progressivity of the tax schedule, and the complexity of the tax code. We explore the implications of changes in these three parameters for entrepreneurial activity, measured by counts of firm births. The Swiss fiscal system offers sufficient intra-national variation in tax codes to allow us to estimate such effects with considerable precision. We find that high average taxes and complicated tax codes depress firm birth rates, while tax progressivity per se promotes firm births. The latter result supports the existence of an insurance effect from progressive corporate income taxes for risk averse entrepreneurs. However, implied elasticities with respect to the level and complexity of corporate taxes are an order of magnitude larger than elasticities with respect to the progressivity of tax schedules.

Road Use Tax Fund Efficiency Report Savings Status, December 31,

Develop, in conjunction with the regional planning affiliations and metropolitan planning organizations and other stakeholder groups, a process to exchange STP federal funds for Primary Highway System funds for the purpose of reducing the number of small projects that have to meet onerous federal requirements. In order to implement this recommendation, legislative action is required to eliminate the restriction on using Primary Road Fund revenue on local jurisdiction roadways in exchange for a portion of their federal STP funding. This past session, Iowa DOT worked with legislators to introduce a bill in both the House and the Senate to eliminate this Code restriction. Bills were discussed at the subcommittee level in both the House and Senate but did not proceed because of the need to have further discussions with impacted parties. Prior to next session, discussions will occur amongst all impacted parties to reach consensus on how this recommendation could be implemented. With that consensus in place prior to next session, it is anticipated that the bills can be reintroduced next session.

Road Use Tax Fund Efficiency Report - March 2013

Senate File 2314, 84th General Assembly, states the Iowa Department of Transportation shall submit quarterly reports regarding the implementation of efficiency measures identified in the “Road Use Tax Fund Efficiency Report,” January 2012. This report shall provide details of activities undertaken in the previous quarter relating to one-time and long-term program efficiencies and partnership efficiencies. Issues covered include savings realized from the implementation of particular efficiency measures; updates concerning measures that have not been implemented; efforts involving cities, counties, other jurisdictions, or stakeholder interest groups; any new efficiency measures identified or undertaken; and identification of any legislative action that may be required to achieve efficiencies.

Is the impact of public investment neutral across the regional income distribution?: evidence from Mexico

This paper investigates the contribution of public investment to the reduction of regional inqualities, with a specific application to Mexico. We use quantile regressions to examine the impact of public investment on regional disparities according to the position of each region in the conditional distribution of regional income. Results confirm the hypothesis that regional inequalities can indeed be atrributed to the regional distribution of public investment, where the observed pattern shows that public investment mainly helped to reduce regional inequalities between the richest regions

Optimal fiscal policy in overlapping generations models

[eng] This paper provides, from a theoretical and quantitative point of view, an explanation of why taxes on capital returns are high (around 35%) by analyzing the optimal fiscal policy in an economy with intergenerational redistribution. For this purpose, the government is modeled explicitly and can choose (and commit to) an optimal tax policy in order to maximize society's welfare. In an infinitely lived economy with heterogeneous agents, the long run optimal capital tax is zero. If heterogeneity is due to the existence of overlapping generations, this result in general is no longer true. I provide sufficient conditions for zero capital and labor taxes, and show that a general class of preferences, commonly used on the macro and public finance literature, violate these conditions. For a version of the model, calibrated to the US economy, the main results are: first, if the government is restricted to a set of instruments, the observed fiscal policy cannot be disregarded as sub optimal and capital taxes are positive and quantitatively relevant. Second, if the government can use age specific taxes for each generation, then the age profile capital tax pattern implies subsidizing asset returns of the younger generations and taxing at higher rates the asset returns of the older ones.